Re: BCP97bis and "freely available"

John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com> Mon, 18 October 2021 20:42 UTC

Return-Path: <john-ietf@jck.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E93D3A0B45 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 18 Oct 2021 13:42:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.898
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id lfR9fs8Zzm4Y for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 18 Oct 2021 13:42:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from bsa2.jck.com (ns.jck.com [70.88.254.51]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 777C13A0A41 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 18 Oct 2021 13:42:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [198.252.137.10] (helo=PSB) by bsa2.jck.com with esmtp (Exim 4.82 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <john-ietf@jck.com>) id 1mcZSI-000Pil-1u; Mon, 18 Oct 2021 16:41:58 -0400
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2021 16:41:51 -0400
From: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
To: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>, ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: BCP97bis and "freely available"
Message-ID: <9D3FDEB39E8F2067EF0152A0@PSB>
In-Reply-To: <58bb1659-97c7-6a44-b833-27fe4c5702ed@gmail.com>
References: <CAL0qLwbwvs2Cp_urgJ=hzc6yEMGDaz3C0xf6RQXRrB89wAx=Rw@mail.gmail.com> <CAL0qLwavK5dYdmYPVxdMT5rA=jBZv1cEyAsVBEWOD7p9MoZR1g@mail.gmail.c om> <CAL0qLwa4ChOsuMkmoP_sAGv3Wn2AcSz1OkijmxZzP+MGvnwviA@mail.gmail.com> <849D7F9E-8AD4-4CE8-A66C-358FB1F2E6AE@tzi.org> <8E6C9FDEA828F341AA36F39C@PSB> <58bb1659-97c7-6a44-b833-27fe4c5702ed@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.0.8 (Win32)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 198.252.137.10
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: john-ietf@jck.com
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on bsa2.jck.com); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/CVMFwy7vAps49PHtJkyNd6dwRro>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2021 20:42:06 -0000


--On Tuesday, October 19, 2021 09:04 +1300 Brian E Carpenter
<brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote:

>...
> I think the original concern was indeed standards that (for 
> proprietary or other reasons) were actually kept secret.
> So "freely" didn't imply "free of charge"; it meant available
> to the general public. In that sense it's closely related
> to "open standards". Those are standards that are open to
> the general public. I think that's what we insist on, and
> "free of charge" is desirable, but not essential.

Right.  But, to see if we are all on the same page about that,
it is very different from justifying a rule that might require
that authors or WGs go out and purchase a large quantity of
copies of a document and distribute them.  

john